WASHINGTON (AP) - An attorney for a California woman whose identity was stolen by her doctor's receptionist urged the Supreme Court on Tuesday to give victims time to sue over damaged credit and the computer-age spread of misinformation.

The court's decision could determine how long credit reporting agencies keep files on American spenders and when they can be sued for getting the facts wrong.

Industry attorneys argue the impossibility of companies' having to keep records indefinitely in anticipation of lawsuits.

Consumer advocates contend the fear of jury verdicts would force the agencies to police their information more closely and catch thieves.

Identity theft has been a popular topic on Capitol Hill. Multiple plans are being discussed to make it more difficult to steal identities. Thieves can use the Internet to get a person's Social Security number, then apply for credit cards and make big purchases.

In this case, Adelaide Andrews' private information was obtained by a medical receptionist, who assumed Andrews' name and moved to a new city, her lawyers said. Andrews sued TRW in 1996 for disclosing her credit reports in 1994 and wrongly including a transaction by the impostor in her credit report.

The suit accuses TRW of violating a federal fair credit reporting law. At issue is a statute of limitations for suing over credit reporting problems, and how much responsibility victims have to investigate and follow up on crimes involving their credit. The Bush administration sided with Andrews.

TRW said such claims must be filed within two years of an alleged problem, and the limit holds even if the problem is not discovered until later.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the time clock should start to run only when the victim discovers the identity theft.

At least 20 percent of people do not find out their theft was stolen within two years, federal statistics show. The average discovery time is 15 months after the fact.

"It's bad enough you're a victim of crime. If you can't do anything about it, that just compounds the problem," said Deborah Zuckerman, an attorney for the older Americans' advocacy organization AARP. Elderly people are frequent victims of fraud, including identify theft.

During oral arguments Tuesday, several justices noted that if the door is left open, companies could face lawsuits years or decades after getting incorrect information and then re-reporting it.

"We will be left defending against claims based on quite unreliable evidence," TRW attorney Glen Nager told the court.

He said federal law requires agencies to keep records one year. The companies generally retain records two years but no more than that because "we have no desire to facilitate the bringing of any actions," Nager said.

Justices seemed intrigued by the concept of a stolen identity, and repeatedly asked for examples.

"The person injured may never know about it," Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said.

John Coffee, a visiting law professor at Harvard, said Andrews could sue the alleged thief, but that probably would yield little money.

Instead, she wanted to sue TRW, a multibillion-dollar corporation. TRW is now out of the credit reporting business.

"This is an attempt to get a large verdict against deep pockets. This Supreme Court is often sympathetic to deep pockets," Coffee said.

Congress was told this spring that identity theft has become a national crisis. The Federal Trade Commission says its identity theft hot line gets about 1,700 calls weekly. Privacy advocates have said the number of people victimized may be as high as 750,000 a year.